Messages - Jolie Was Here

I've used my Macs all three years with no major problems. And of course, when minor problems come up, the Mac service sure is nice. Most things can be resolved at the Genius Bar on the spot, but the one time I had to mail my MacBook Pro out, they had it back to me in a little less than 3 days. It was like magic.

I'd say our school is at least 50/50 at this point, and the Macs may even be in the majority by now.

What, if any, are the conditions on keeping the Cardozo scholly? I went through a similar decision, debating between a 'Dozo full ride + stipend and sticker at a few much higher-ranked schools. I went with one of the other schools, in large part because I knew how easily I could lose that scholarship, which required top 1/3 to maintain. At the time I was making my decision, Cardozo had a reputation of stacking all of the big scholarship recipients in one section, thereby guaranteeing that many would lose their meal tickets. Y'know, what with the curve and all.

To be fair, that was several years ago (I started fall '06) and I have no knowledge of how they do things now. I believe they have a new director of admissions since then. All I'm saying is that you should take into account the possibility of losing the scholarship after the first year, and try to gauge how likely or unlikely that scenario is.

Definitely check in with them. Sarah's not the kind of person (nor is Liz, nor the rest of the staff) who would be put off by a straightforward, "Hey, any chance I'm getting some $$ love?" That said, merit money will definitely come from them rather than Fin. Aid.

oh and i just noticed jolie's post in this thread. i'll take that as enough reason to soften the language i used in my original post ("graduate degrees... next to nothing"), though i maintain that yale, stanford, and berkeley would be a waste of money and that cls and nyu are the very outside reaches. jolie, you disagree? also, hi.

Agreed. More anecdotal stuff (likely useless): I took a Feb. LSAT and applied that year to CLS and NYU for shits and giggles. I was already working full-time in NYC, why not? NYU immediately dinged me, CLS waitlisted me . . . even though my application came in after their deadline. Of course, they eventually dinged me too, but they kept me on the waitlist until classes began. The next year I cast a wider net, applied earlyish, etc. NYU immediately dinged me, CLS immediately waitlisted me. I doubt they would have taken me the 2d time around either, but I pulled myself off the WL before they decided.

Also, hi back, Marble. Are you one of my name-changing friends? I'm not around enough anymore to keep track.

Here's the thing: if you're a deep splitter with a GPA that's going to be <25% just about everywhere, the best case scenario for admissions is 1) LSAT > 75%, 2) several years distance from that GPA, preferably with 3) an interesting career in the intervening years, and 4) a graduate degree with good numbers.

The LSAT piece is obvious; no sense rehashing that. And I believe there's consensus that time away won't erase the sting of a crap GPA but will slightly mitigate it (if it's coupled with a high LSAT). The interesting career is definitely a soft – it's not going to drastically alter the range of schools that will take you, but will likely boost you over someone with similarly desirable (or undesirable) numbers and no interesting career.

The real wild card is the graduate degree. No question that even in this scenario it's a soft, but I believe that these are the candidates who benefit the most from the grad degree. The LSAT/GPA thing isn't just for the rankings – adcomms also live by them because they have *some* predictive value. The classic story is that the LSAT tells them if you have the intellectual chops to do the work and the GPA tells them if you have the discipline and drive to do the work. (Don't shoot the messenger! I'm the first to tell you that this analysis is crap for many many people, but it's the story nonetheless). This is one of the reasons that time away will help temper a low GPA. Anyway, I have it straight from 2 different horses' mouths that a good graduate transcript reassures them that a high LSAT/low GPA splitter candidate is a safe bet. Now, I'm sure that not every Dean of Admission views it this way, but many do.

So basically this was a really long-winded way of saying that if you're stuck with a sub-3.0 UG GPA, this is the best possible set of circumstances for T14 admissions. And (although this is purely anecdotal and should be taken with the proverbial salt lick) I'm not entirely talking out of my ass:

Jolie – 28 y.o. at submission of application (matric. at 29), 2.6 UG GPA, 172, 6 years WE in an interesting career (though not nearly as interesting as the OP's, from the sounds of it), 3.9 grad GPA. 2 T14 acceptances, 2 T14 WL (w/drew before final resolution), 2 T14 dings.

You're going to get VERY different answers depending on personal characteristics/preferences. Ex: I hate apartment complexes. Hate them. I'm not fond of the 'burbs, so I prefer to be w/in city limits. I have two large dogs, so that a) limits the places I can rent and b) influences the type of setting I look for. Neighborhood and "character" and setting and price (and in-home laundry) are really important to me, so I sacrifice on things like proximity. LOTS of other people have different needs and rank these things differently. You'll hear plenty of people tell you that you must must must be w/in a 5 minute walk of the law school, but that's a non-starter as far as I'm concerned.

Anyway, my super roundabout point is that you're better off figuring out what types of things are important to you, do a little research on Ann Arbor's neighborhoods, and then ask for advice. Otherwise anything I tell you now will be wildly subjective based on my likes/dislikes/whathaveyou.

Now that I've refused to be useful, I'll share some very helpful links. These both tell you about A2's neighborhoods and are a great starting place. I find the umich site slightly better but it's probably worth checking both.

Alright, so are you saying that there's no point to going to law school if you finish at the bottom of your class?

No, we're saying that there's no point in finishing law school if after 1 semester you already know in your heart it's not the right career path for you AND you're at the bottom of your class. Yes, it's true that the 1L curriculum is very tilted toward litigationish work, but the OP doesn't seem to have any interest in studying law. That's different than not wanting to litigate.